Merivoimien kehitysnäkymät

[John Hilly]

Vaikeaa on brittilaivastollakin. Maassa on käynnistä nettikampanja "Save the Royal Navy"

One Last Chance to Save the Royal Navy’s Flagship
The helicopter carrier HMS ‘Ocean’ will sail into the sunset unless Britain finds the money … and the sailors
by ROBERT BECKHUSEN

HMS Ocean, the British Royal Navy’s flagship, will retire in 2018 to be either sold or scrapped.

She is Britain’s sole carrier, at least until the 280-meter-long HMS Queen Elizabeth becomes fully operational in 2020. A second new flattop, Prince of Wales, will be ready for combat in 2023. These ships will initially operate 24 vertical-lift F-35B Joint Strike Fighters each.

The 203-meter-long Ocean, however, is not a “true” carrier. She is an amphibious assault ship with 18 helicopters and no fighter jets — and her cavernous hold allows the vessel to disgorge hundreds of Royal Marines aboard landing craft.

Which means that for five years, the Royal Navy’s amphibious capability will fall to its two smaller Albion-class landing docks, of which only one is currently operational due to cost. During that time, the Royal Navy will modify Prince of Wales to take over Ocean’s job, with Queen Elizabeth to possibly follow.

There is deep uneasiness about this in British military circles. Not the least because it’s exceedingly unlikely both Queen Elizabeth-class carriers will operate at the same time. Carriers are complex machines and need regular maintenance, so one will likely rest in dock when the other is away.

More to the point, the Royal Navy will have to make choices when Prince of Wales is at sea. The flattop could focus on training with her amphibious modifications, or behave as a true carrier … albeit one that just happens to launch Marines from time to time.

The problem with doing several things is that you’re a master of none.

HMS ‘Ocean’ with helicopters and landing craft off the Polish coast in June 2015. U.S. Navy photo
Different missions require different vessels, and in some situations, a smaller carrier is preferable to a bigger one.

The 21,500-ton Ocean is partially built to civilian manufacturing standards, which makes her relatively cheap to operate, but more vulnerable in a war. Ocean-based Apache gunships participated in the 2011 NATO war in Libya, but forces loyal to dictator Muammar Gaddafi couldn’t strike back.

It would be an enormous understatement to say the situation would be different versus Russia — or other foes around the world.

As Ocean is a helicopter carrier, she would need protection from Queen Elizabeth-class flattops and their F-35s. Her helicopters would come in handy for hunting hostile submarines, although Ocean was not initially designed with this role in mind.

However, Ocean trained to hunt submarines with her Merlin, Sea King and Lynx helicopters as recently as summer 2016. Ocean’s civilian standards also make her better suited for humanitarian and disaster relief missions compared to a fully-fledged, $5.5 billion battle carrier.

The online campaign Save the Royal Navy has urged the British government to reconsider retiring Ocean, but it’s a tall order. For instance, the Royal Navy simply doesn’t have enough sailors to crew her and its twin Queen Elizabeths.

Once Prince of Wales arrives, Ocean will have to go. Or at the least, she won’t sail. But the campaign — comprised of civilians, academics and former Royal Navy sailors — has suggested putting the ship in reserve.

“This would give the option of activating the ship in an emergency (using naval reservists and moving manpower from non-essential jobs),” the campaign’s website noted.

“If the manpower situation was to ease HMS Ocean could possibly be reactivated in future.”

But another problem, which the campaigners quickly point out, is the fact that Ocean is aging.

The carrier launched in 1995 with an expected service life of 20 years, and she requires retrofitting to stay seaworthy. Ocean completed her last upgrade in 2015, and the flattop is not too old in absolute terms, but every penny counts for Britain’s tight defense budget.

“To re-activate her might require some work but better to have a ship in an imperfect state than no ship at all,” the campaigners asserted. “Who would bet against her giving good service for at least another decade if sold to a lower-tier foreign navy?”

It’d be a risky bet.

https://warisboring.com/one-last-chance-to-save-the-royal-navys-flagship-2b5edbe0512b#.pxo99qrcm

 

[Tups]

Saksalaiset hankkivat viisi korvettia 1.5 miljardilla eurolla - hintalappu on siis sama kuin Suomen uusilla laivoilla:

http://gcaptain.com/germany-to-spend-1-5-billion-euros-on-more-navy-ships/

Die Welt said Germany’s goal was to have two of the new ships enter service as early as 2019, with the remaining three to follow in 2023. The ships will be based on the current Braunschweig-class of corvettes.

Sen sijaan isompien laivojen hankinta lykkääntyy:

http://gcaptain.com/contract-for-5-billion-german-multi-role-warships-delayed/

A tender worth around 4 billion euros ($4.5 billion) for four warships for the German navy has been delayed by around six months to ensure quality standards are met, according to a copy of a defence ministry letter seen by Reuters on Tuesday.

The new are expected to be delivered from 2023. They are intended to be capable of attacking targets on land and underwater and providing aerial protection to other vessels.

 

[magitsu]

Nehän on laittaneet ison vaihteen silmään Kriegsm... siis Deutsche Marinessa.

De.wikipediassa hyvästi juttua.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehrzweckkampfschiff_180

 

[Leaderwolf]

Nehän on laittaneet ison vaihteen silmään Kriegsm... siis Deutsche Marinessa.

 

[Merten sheriffi]

Nehän on laittaneet ison vaihteen silmään Kriegsm... siis Deutsche Marinessa.

De.wikipediassa hyvästi juttua.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehrzweckkampfschiff_180

Täytyy liputtaa merellä, kun maaperällä lipputankoja koristaa jo monesti ISIS liput.

 

[Radar]

Ainut fregattiluokan alus joka tulisi hintansa puolesta kysymykseen on saksassa etelä-afrikalle rakennettu valour luokan fregatti hintalappu $ 327 miljoonaa. Näyttää olevan aseistukseltaan juuri sopiva laiva. Muut olivat joko liaan kalliita tai aseistukseltaan enemmän vartiolaivoja kuiin todellisia sotaluksia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valour-class_frigate

 

[Merten sheriffi]

Futuristinen USS Zumwalt palvelukseen - voi kopterien ohella ottaa vastaan F-35-hävittäjiä

Yhdysvaltain merivoimien erikoisesti muotoiltu häivehävittäjä USS Zumwalt otettiin palvelukseen 15. lokakuuta Baltimoressa. Stealth-muotoillussa aluksessa on aiempia hävittäjäluokkia suurempi lentokansi. Sille voi omien MH-60R SeaHawk -helikopterien ohella väliaikaisesti tukeutua MV-22 Osprey tiltrotor -koneita ja jopa F-35B Lightning II STOVL -hävittäjiä.

Uusi alusluokka on esimerkki asejärjestelmästä, jonka kustannukset karkasivat käsistä. Alunperin niitä piti rakentaa 32 kappaletta, nyt niitä tehdään vain kolme. Siten yhden aluksen hinnaksi muodostuukin käsittämättömät yli neljä miljardia dollaria. US Navy hankkiikin vastaisuudessa lisää perinteisempiä Arleigh Burke -luokan hävittäjiä.

Zumwalt on suunniteltu ajatellen mahdollisimman pientä tutkaheijastusta. Keula on taaksepäin viisto ja kaikki rakenteet kapenevat ylöspäin mentäessä. Myös keulakannen tykkitorneissa on häivemuotoilu. Tutkien tasoantennit sijaitsevat kansirakenteessa.

Aluksessa on käytetty mahdollimman paljon tutkaheijastusta pienentäviä komposiittimateriaaleja. Joidenkin arvioiden mukaan uuden hävittäjän tutkaheijastus vastaisikin lähinnä pientä kalastusalusta.

Zumwaltin päätehtävänä on tulituki maakohteisiin tykeillä ja ohjuksilla. Silti se luonnollisesti kykenee myös ilmapuolustukseen ja toimintaan toisia aluksia sekä vedenalaisia kohteita vastaan.

Ohjukset on sijoitettu aluksen reunoille VLS-siiloihin (Vertical Launch System). Niitä on kaikkiaan 80 kappaletta. Pääase ilmamaaleja vastaan on RIM-162 ESSM -ohjus (Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile). Jokaiseen VLS-siiloon voidaan sijoittaa neljä sellaista.

Lisäksi siiloissa on aina maakohteita vastaan käytettäviä Tomahawk-risteilyohjuksia ja ASROC-sukellusveneentorjuntaohjuksia (Anti-Submarine ROCket).

Hävittäjille tulee kaksi 155 mm tykkiä, joiden kantama rakettiavusteisella LRLAP-kranaatilla (Long Range Land Attack Projectile) on jopa 150 kilometriä. Aseet on tarkoitettu antamaan tulitukea maakohteisiin. Lähitorjuntaa varten Zumwalteille tulee kaksi 30 mm Bushmaster -tykkiä.

Alus on merkittävästi suurempi kuin aiemmat US Navyn hävittäjäluokat. Siten Zumwaltin peräosassa on laajempi lentokansi ja siihen liittyvä hangaari omia Sikorsky MH-60 SeaHawk -sukellusveneentorjuntakoptereita varten. Myös miehittämättömät UAV-ilma-alukset (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) voivat tukeutua alukselle, mutta US Navy ei ole kertonut tarkemmin mistä tyypeistä on kyse.

Navyn mukaan kannella on tarpeeksi tilaa jopa pystysuoraan nousuun ja laskuun kykeneville Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II STOVL -hävittäjälle (Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing).

Myös helikopterin ja lentokoneen ominaisuudet yhdistävä Bell Boeing MV-22 Osprey -tiltrotor voi operoida alukselta (kuvassa vasemmalla Rissalan lentonäytöksessä viime kesänä).

Zumwaltia liikuttaa merellä sähköinen voimalinja, jossa kaksi Rolls Royce MT30-suihkuturbiinia pyörittää generaattoreita. Alus etenee sähkömoottorien voimalla. Järjestelmät tuottavat 78 MW tehon, jossa on varauduttu myös tulevaisuuden asejärjestelmiin kuten sähköisiin raidetykkeihin ja lasereihin. T.T.

 

[Merten sheriffi]

Olen yrittänyt metsästää Zumwaltin lippalakkia mutta tuloksetta. Se täytyy kyllä saada ja mielellään myös laiva Suomeen vierailulle. Siihen toki taitaa mennä tovi jos toinenkin.

 

[ctg]

 

[Sarek1]

Tuosta F-35:n laskeutumisesta (?) tai mahdollisesta noususta (?) Zumwaltin kannelta: mahtaako kansi tai runko tarvita jotain lämpösuojausta operointia varten vai onko se jo valmiina?

Kuljettamaanhan pystyy, jos kannella on tilaa ja kantavuus riittää.

 

[Leaderwolf]

Tuosta F-35:n laskeutumisesta (?) tai mahdollisesta noususta (?) Zumwaltin kannelta: mahtaako kansi tai runko tarvita jotain lämpösuojausta operointia varten vai onko se jo valmiina?

Kuljettamaanhan pystyy, jos kannella on tilaa ja kantavuus riittää.

Miten muuten tuo suojaus käytännössä jossei ole ns.built-in, riittääkö jotkin keraamiset suojalevyt?

 

[Raveni]

Tuosta F-35:n laskeutumisesta (?) tai mahdollisesta noususta (?) Zumwaltin kannelta: mahtaako kansi tai runko tarvita jotain lämpösuojausta operointia varten vai onko se jo valmiina?

Kuljettamaanhan pystyy, jos kannella on tilaa ja kantavuus riittää.

En epäile laskeutumista mutta jäin miettimään miten ihmeessä se tuosta nousee kun tarvitsee siihen lyhyen tien pätkän muutoinkin?

 

[Gyllis1]

En epäile laskeutumista mutta jäin miettimään miten ihmeessä se tuosta nousee kun tarvitsee siihen lyhyen tien pätkän muutoinkin?

Ei tarvi, toki koneessa ei silloin kyllä varmasti liiemmälti kuormaakaan ole.

Mitä tulee itse artikkeliin, en usko että ihan vähään aikaan tullaan näkemään Zumwaltilta operoiva F-35. Ja vähään aikaan tässä yhteydessä on ikinä.

 

[Raveni]

Niin F-35:sta mainostetaan pystysuoranlaskun ja lyhyen nousun koneena. Veikkaan, että se ei koskaan tule nousemaan pystysuoraan siten, että sillä olisi taistelussa merkitystä.

 

[Merten sheriffi]

Tässähän mennään vain ajassa hieman taaksepäin. Toisessa maailmansodassa raskailla taistelualuksilla oli kannella kevyempiä tiedustelukoneita. Jopa sukellusveneillä.

 

[Raveni]

Mutta olishan se komiaa jos aluksen hangaarissa olisikin tuollainen eikä helikopteria...

 

[Einomies1]

Suomen jäänmurtolaivaston ylpeys on valmis:

http://arctech.fi/fi/maailman-ensimmainen-lng-kayttoinen-jaanmurtaja-polaris-luovutettu/
http://gcaptain.com/arctech-helsink...st-lng-powered-icebreaker-finnish-government/
http://tekniikanmaailma.fi/muu-tekniikka/polaris-maailman-ensimmainen-lng-kayttoinen-jaanmurtaja/

Nyt on hieno video jossa painetaan komeesti rallienglannilla...

 

[John Hilly]

Asiaa brittien uusista Successor -luokan sukellusveneistä.


A concept image of the new ‘Succesor’ class. BAE Systems illustration

The Royal Navy’s Next Nuclear Missile Sub Will Be Bigger and Quieter
‘Successor’-class boomers could feature an all-electric motor
by DAVE MAJUMDAR

The United Kingdom has started production on its new [URL='http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-equipment/submarines/future-submarines/successor-class']Successor-class

ballistic missile submarines.

The four new boats will be the largest submarines ever built for the Royal Navy — displacing 17,200 tons with a length of around 502 feet — but they will only have 12 missile tubes rather than the 16 found aboard the current Vanguard class.

The new boomers will also share technology with their U.S. Navy counterparts — the Columbia-class Ohio Replacement Program SSBNs — using a common missile compartment, or CMC, design. Once completed, the new boomers will enter service in the 2030s.

“Britain’s ballistic missile submarines are the ultimate guarantee of our nation’s safety — we use them every day to deter the most extreme threats,” British Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said. “We cannot know what new dangers we might face in the 2030s, 2040s and 2050s so we are acting now to replace them.”

In October, the British government approved an initial £1.3 billion in funding for the new ballistic missile submarines. That initial outlay will cover long-lead items — such as the CMCs — and preparing the shipyard at Barrow-in-Furness for the task of building the enormous new vessels.

There is not much information available about the technical characteristics of the British Successor-class design. While the 17,200-ton boats will be larger than their 15,900-ton Vanguard-class predecessors, the new SSBNs will carry four fewer missiles.

The ‘Successor’ class will feature 12 missiles tubes for the Trident, one depicted above launching from the USS ‘Maryland.’ U.S. Navy photo
Part of the reason for the vessels’ larger size is likely due to the need for enhanced stealth — larger submarines are inherently quieter.

But it is also possible that the British have adopted an all-electric permanent magnet motor to drive the boat — similar to what is planned for the Columbia-class — for their new SSBNs, which might also account for the increased displacement.

Indeed, the British submarines’ PWR-3 pressurized water reactor plant is thought to draw heavily upon the technology used on the U.S. Navy’s General Electric S9G reactor plant found aboard the Virginia-class attack submarines.

However, the Columbia-class will have a newer 42-year life-of-the-boat reactor that is significantly more powerful than the S9G.

The Successors are already going to share their CMC modules with their Columbia-class counterparts, so a reactor-sharing arrangement is not outside the realm of possibility.

Indeed, according to General Dynamics’ Will Lennon — the company’s vice president of engineering and design programs, who spoke to The National Interest earlier this year — the CMCs will be built in modular units of four tubes — or “Quad-Packs.”

While the Columbia-class will use four Quad-Packs for a total of 16 missiles, the smaller British Successors will use only three for a total of 12 tubes.



The Royal Navy’s Next Nuclear Missile Sub Will Be Bigger and Quieter
‘Successor’-class boomers could feature an all-electric motor
by DAVE MAJUMDAR

The United Kingdom has started production on its new Successor-class ballistic missile submarines.

The four new boats will be the largest submarines ever built for the Royal Navy — displacing 17,200 tons with a length of around 502 feet — but they will only have 12 missile tubes rather than the 16 found aboard the current Vanguard class.

The new boomers will also share technology with their U.S. Navy counterparts — the Columbia-class Ohio Replacement Program SSBNs — using a common missile compartment, or CMC, design. Once completed, the new boomers will enter service in the 2030s.

“Britain’s ballistic missile submarines are the ultimate guarantee of our nation’s safety — we use them every day to deter the most extreme threats,” British Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said. “We cannot know what new dangers we might face in the 2030s, 2040s and 2050s so we are acting now to replace them.”

In October, the British government approved an initial £1.3 billion in funding for the new ballistic missile submarines. That initial outlay will cover long-lead items — such as the CMCs — and preparing the shipyard at Barrow-in-Furness for the task of building the enormous new vessels.

There is not much information available about the technical characteristics of the British Successor-class design. While the 17,200-ton boats will be larger than their 15,900-ton Vanguard-class predecessors, the new SSBNs will carry four fewer missiles.

The ‘Successor’ class will feature 12 missiles tubes for the Trident, one depicted above launching from the USS ‘Maryland.’ U.S. Navy photo
Part of the reason for the vessels’ larger size is likely due to the need for enhanced stealth — larger submarines are inherently quieter.

But it is also possible that the British have adopted an all-electric permanent magnet motor to drive the boat — similar to what is planned for the Columbia-class — for their new SSBNs, which might also account for the increased displacement.

Indeed, the British submarines’ PWR-3 pressurized water reactor plant is thought to draw heavily upon the technology used on the U.S. Navy’s General Electric S9G reactor plant found aboard the Virginia-class attack submarines.

However, the Columbia-class will have a newer 42-year life-of-the-boat reactor that is significantly more powerful than the S9G.

The Successors are already going to share their CMC modules with their Columbia-class counterparts, so a reactor-sharing arrangement is not outside the realm of possibility.

Indeed, according to General Dynamics’ Will Lennon — the company’s vice president of engineering and design programs, who spoke to The National Interest earlier this year — the CMCs will be built in modular units of four tubes — or “Quad-Packs.”

While the Columbia-class will use four Quad-Packs for a total of 16 missiles, the smaller British Successors will use only three for a total of 12 tubes.

The tubes are the same 87-inch diameter vessels as the current Trident II D5 launchers on the present day Ohio and Vanguard classes, but are a foot longer — leaving some margin for a future missile design.

Other innovations found aboard the new British boomers focus on crew comforts. The new submarines will have separate classrooms and study areas, a sickbay with a doctor, a gym as well as separate berthing for female crew members.

Additionally, the submarine will have a new lighting system to better simulate nighttime and daytime. Thus, life aboard a Successor should be more pleasant than a Vanguard.
The tubes are the same 87-inch diameter vessels as the current Trident II D5 launchers on the present day Ohio and Vanguard classes, but are a foot longer — leaving some margin for a future missile design.

Other innovations found aboard the new British boomers focus on crew comforts. The new submarines will have separate classrooms and study areas, a sickbay with a doctor, a gym as well as separate berthing for female crew members.

Additionally, the submarine will have a new lighting system to better simulate nighttime and daytime. Thus, life aboard a Successor should be more pleasant than a Vanguard.http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-equipment/submarines/future-submarines/successor-class

https://warisboring.com/the-royal-navys-next-nuclear-missile-sub-will-be-bigger-and-quieter-dfacf45ea455#.wuhdovbes[/URL]

 

[TBman]

Tuli tuota zumvaltin mutkittelua kateltua ja kävi mielessä, että perämelan akseli jäänyt rasvaamatta, kun noin ohjaa "yli", mutta joo, se onkin sitä taktista kiemurtelua. Ja en ole merivoimissa palvellut

 

[Einomies1]

Vaikeaa on brittilaivastollakin. Maassa on käynnistä nettikampanja "Save the Royal Navy"





https://warisboring.com/one-last-chance-to-save-the-royal-navys-flagship-2b5edbe0512b#.pxo99qrcm

Erikoinen väite että tilanne olisi jatkuvasti niin että BAE:n uusista tukialuksista toinen on telakalla. Tuskin niin on tarkoitettu vaikka tukialukset eivät olekaan ydinkäyttöisiä.
Toinen seikka tietysti on se että onko Brittilaivastolla varaa ajaa molemmilla yhtä aikaa. Vaikka käyttökustannuksia laskee uusin teknologia, sitä ei tee helpommaksi 40 F-35 taistelukonetta joiden pitäisi tukeutua alukselle. Noin paljon ei Brittitukialukset ole kantaneet koneita sitten toisen maailmansodan purkkien.